Skip to main content

Reply to this post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: InfiniteOhms Date: Dec 1, 2003 3:26am
Forum: etree Subject: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

ssia ... lets try and be civilized ;)

[Update- Aaron, I apologize for slight hijack of your post here, just inserting direct pointer to Brewster's discussion-leading post:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=10434
-Diana, mod]

This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-12-01 11:26:21

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: brewster Date: Nov 28, 2003 12:52am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Yes, I am back and have been slow on my mission to figure out what to do here. I was hoping for a bright flash of insight, but nothing... So I write up something to see if we can work something here.

-brewster

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: kmcmurtrie Date: Nov 28, 2003 1:04am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

In the previous thread much of the discussion was over taper's rights. Might I suggest LMA get a legal opinion to end that often acrimonious argument?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Nov 28, 2003 6:50am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: legal opinions have been posted

There are 2 relevant posts here apparently already giving legal advice re tapers:

Patron/taper/lawyer Chuck Hatfield has generously posted his analysis in this post:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=9649

Nic Caudle, archivist for the band Lake Trout, has also kindly posted comments from his retained counsel:
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=9602

Note I'm referring only to those 2 specific posts, not the whole thread, as there are many layman postings in the thread that may not be as accurate.

This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-11-28 14:50:18

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Ethan P. Date: Nov 28, 2003 1:26pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

.

This post was modified by Ethan P. on 2003-11-28 21:26:33

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 28, 2003 7:23am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Yes as I have said multiple times a sample mp3 is the only compromise here that could suit both sides..but it cant be a full track...

and again its pointless to talk about ogg .. mp3 is compressed enough :-)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Ethan P. Date: Nov 28, 2003 1:26pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

.

This post was modified by Ethan P. on 2003-11-28 21:26:03

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 28, 2003 11:26am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

its not even worh talking about ogg..its nothing to be overly impressed about..

anyways if the samples are in mp3 the file size will be tiny.. no reason even for a dial-up user to complain..

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: echo2288 Date: Nov 28, 2003 8:57am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

The entire point of an "archive" is to have the best quality media preserved. Using a lossless compression algorithm such as mp3 is entirely counterintuitive to this mission. I'll leave ATRAC and Analog masters out of this as these are two separate issues.

I put it to you again, just as I did a month ago, that if you decide to allow full mp3 conversions to coexist with lossless methods, I believe you will find that most tapers (myself included) will very quickly stop uploading and request that their sources not be subject to mp3 watering-down.

15 or 30 second samples of a song or two from each source is a concession I'd be willing to make, but only if they aren't entire tracks.

Most source files attached to these lossless copies say quite specifically "Do NOT convert to lossy formats." If the IA begins converting these shows to mp3, ogg vorbis, or whatever, I believe you will learn a quick lesson in biting the hand that feeds you.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: alienbobz Date: Nov 28, 2003 9:34am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

I agree with pretty much everyone here that mp3s should not be done. The question I have is that if a certain rare song was played, could someone get the whole thing in mp3 format? How about also if the taper can pick which songs he/she thinks are the best to give clips of and quite possibly a full mp3 of? I am sure that there are lots of concerts out there where you want to hear the highlight song of that show, but you don't want to get the shn. Let me know what you think.

Jarod

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: VA_TAPER Date: Nov 29, 2003 12:28am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

I'll be the dissenting voice from the Tapers side, hopefully this will not invoke flames, it is merely my opinion; and I certainly do not speak nor will attempt to speak for all tapers.

While prior to the archive I had always added "PLEASE DO NOT ENCODE THIS SHN TO MP3" to my setlist. Since the creation of the archive, I haven't found a need to this. If someone wants a pure unadulterated source it is archived here; there is no dilution of the trading pool as in the old days.

Just like in a "brick and mortar" archive, there are oft reading copies of important manuscripts to allow more access to the material; this would be akin to adding mp3s to this archive, it opens up distribution, but doesn't cheapen the shns stored here as they are still archived and available.

I strive (as I'm sure most tapers do) to produce very high quality recordings. As long as the reference copy is always available here, I could care less if a lower quality version was hosted along with it.

Again, I speak only for myself, and do not intend this to be used as a statement for all tapers or even any group of tapers.

peace, chris

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: alienbobz Date: Nov 29, 2003 1:06am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Chris,

I agree with the post. I think it makes sense but the problem is if the archive allowed whole shows to be downloadable in mp3 format, then the trading pool could and probably would be destroyed. A "newbie" could download a show in mp3 format, burn it to wav, start up a trading list, and mark all of their shows as cdr and fool some of the older traders. I wish the archive could be something similar to what you said in your post, but I don't think it could be.

Jarod

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: VA_TAPER Date: Nov 29, 2003 1:39am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

But if everyone knew that they could get the original source from the archive, then it would be a non-issue. The onus would be on anyone who who wanted an original source.

Trading audio CDs is an imperfect form of trading anyway as bit accurate reproduction of them is not guarenteed. If shns are traded the md5s can be compared with that of the show on the archive. I assume imperfect processing of all my audio cd based sources unless I got them from the taper, DAT mastere clones and SHNs/FLACs with md5s are the only true sources I trust in the first place.

Also with the creation of the archive, trading in downloadable sources is heading the way of the dodo. Chances are if you want a downloadable source and you can't (or are unwilling to) d/l it yourself, you have at least one friend who can do it for you. Why bother to set up a cross country snail mail trade?


****These opinions are my opinions only and do not represent the feelings of the majority of the taping community*****

This post was modified by VA_TAPER on 2003-11-29 09:39:15

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: VA_TAPER Date: Nov 29, 2003 2:30am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Two related items:

1. I am not convinced that even though the archive has the legal right to convert the shows to mp3 that it is the right thing to do. Maybe a compromise could be met in that initially only tapers who request their shows be co-hosted have theirs converted, we can move from there?

2. Since I began mirroring my shows in mp3 on a private site, I have gotten emails from audiences that I wouldn't have imagined have been wanting these shows. As an American, I am guilty as most in having a western centric view of the world. Emails have come to me from Slovenia, Estonia, Russia, Israel, South Africa to name a few thanking me for hosting mp3s of shows they can only dream of attending. Some of these people spend a few days trying to get one mp3, others told stories of having B+P packages confiscated upon return as suspected piracy. If the goal is to share music as openly as possible, I would gladly put a check in the box on the contribution center page to allow conversion of shows I taped to mp3; I would hope others would eventually do the same.

peace, chris

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Nov 29, 2003 8:49am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

Interesting wide perspective, thanks! Giving another view well over the banks of the tiny trading pool, a patron posted some data much earlier:

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=6225

This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-11-29 16:49:24

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: gsisak Date: Nov 29, 2003 9:00am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

i don't see how that link is relavant in the least. either way. i vote for 30 seconds samples only. i'm already "hoarding" about 5 shows i taped because i know if i release them to the general public them they'll end up on here. don't want anything i've taped on here till i know for sure it won't be converted to mp3 or some other crap. so basically 30 second samples or don't expect to see any of my of shows.
george

This post was modified by gsisak on 2003-11-29 17:00:34

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: woostahDave Date: Nov 30, 2003 10:22am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

that post is extremely relevant. maybe tapers would not have such an elitist view on "contaminating" their lossless audio if they went a week without broadband and gave up their gigs of hard drives and cdrs. pretty much every band's taping policy emphasizes sharing and spreading the music rather than keeping it away from the masses for matters of pride. i feel if some bands read the selfish posts threatening to demand the removal of all shows uploaded here, they would strongly reconsider allowing that person to tape their shows.

anyways, the original source can always be found here, so anyone concerned about lossless audio could easily find it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Tyler Date: Nov 30, 2003 10:50am
Forum: etree Subject: id3 tags?

"anyways, the original source can always be found here, so anyone concerned about lossless audio could easily find it. "

exactly. I don't know much about the process, but i assume info could be added to the mp3 files as an 'id3' tag right? perhaps since the details pages are static, each mp3 could have a part about where the mp3 came from and how it was from the original master .shn source which could be gotten for free at http://www.archive.org/audio/.... you know? file / song names are probably too much work, but i think some sort of pointer back to the archive with the mp3 would be good, so if one file is floating out there someone who wants the entire show in .shn quality can find it if they don't know about the archive.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: woostahDave Date: Nov 30, 2003 11:49am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: id3 tags?

that sounds like a good idea, although it still would not address the tapers concern that someone could burn the files to cd, rip the audio and then pass them off as originals. isn't it fairly easy to detect such "undercover" mp3's? is there a program that does this?

There is a music site out there (to remain nameless) which allows you to download lossless audio files, but can also encode, on the fly, into mp3 and ogg at any number of bit rates so the downloader can choose his format. this might be a good solution (although difficult for the programmers). it is no different than someone who downloads the shns and then converts them to mp3 on their computer. i am sure this happens all the time and tapers cannot control it.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 30, 2003 11:21pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: id3 tags?

Sure no one can control that but atleast the downloader has to take the time to learn how to deal with SHN/Flac and how to convert it to mp3... if they can go through all that and still disregard all the community standards then they are helpless.. but if just one person was to go through all that and learn that its ok to trade shows in SHN/Flac and only ok to have the mp3's for personal use then thats a victory... that victory will be impossible if we go down his proposed road...

In my opinion what some people are calling borader access is more like making us more lazy!

There is a saying.. perhaps something everyone needs to repeat to themselves on a day to day basis(me included) in this world off instant information..
"anything good takes time"


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 1, 2003 12:12am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: id3 tags?

Beyond "lazy", beyond even trading, see
http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=10441

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Dec 1, 2003 12:55am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: id3 tags?

sure thats a touching story and I mean no disrespect to your father.. but how is one able to repsond to something like that.. id feel better reading it if it was non biased otherwise it feels tainted in my view. Because its very obvious where you stand on this issue.

*just pointing out my view, not attacking anyone*

actually I've been debating for months now with a good friend of mine who works in a library and like me is a taper... he sees this similar to the posters he works with.. he provides a master image in tiff format which is huge like SHN and then smaller samples in jpeg for example..

I can see where he has a point that its worthwile to have a copy for both purposes like brewster pointed out in his post.. but as far as the archive goes there needs to be a bigger disctinction... perhaps building an interface which allows users to stream mp3's but NOT download them and then having the SHN/Flac for people to download..
I think there is wiggle room when I say stream so thats its not perceived to be a radio station but who knows maybe I am wrong..


Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 1, 2003 3:32am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: individual perspective-shifting

its very obvious where you stand on this issue.

Right Matt, just as it's obvious from your posts where you stand, and from some other contributors about where they stand on various points. ;) But don't worry, although I help volunteer here, I'm certainly not a person to make the directional decisions here, I'm just one of the discussers along with you. As friendly debaters, we'd each like to get our point well across. :)

Y'know, as one of the earlier ones to push SHN and as keeper of a SHN FAQ for some years now, I've been in the trading trenches along with you pushing for "quality training" and raising the "SHN, not mp3" banner within our little trading community. Within the last couple years, my thinking has evolved beyond that because of a couple of big factors:

-As Marco said last month, it's now clear that "we won the war" in the trading community- anything else is just mopup. ;) IMO there's enough critical mass of clued-in people now to train the new traders who may be confused about what we trade and why we trade it. We have a mighty weight of trading culture, so many help resources to support that, and so many nagging voices to point traders to them. ;) That is cool.

-I've seen how internet music access has shifted so dramatically in our national/global culture that it's- amazingly!- dwarfed the internet trading community that basically started it all, even though our community is mighty on its own. I have my dad's example, a whole different-style example with a brother that I won't go into now ;) and there are so many other stories out there, from "regular people." They've swayed me.

Diana "the SHN Queen" (heh)

This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-12-01 11:32:19

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 30, 2003 11:46pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

hmm what did we "elitist" tapers/traders do before broadband.. we used snail mail...we invested time in it because it was worth waiting for..

Actually there are many many more shows out there which you will never hear because there are some folks out there who dont ever convert there shows for the masses.. they just keep them on dat in their apt/house and they collect dust.. so you should be thankful to people who take the time to convert the shows and post them for your enjoyment.. they dont get paid.. and they end up spending a lot more than they ever intended.. if they dont get any legal rights at all..they least they deserve is some respect...

Its also ridiculous to say anyone is cutting anyone off from the music.. its is readily available you just have to invest some time to get at it..

We already have gone forward with broader access.. because most of this music had only previously been available online on ftp sites..

Do we want quality or quanitity is the real question... and when its music Quality should win everytime!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bisq Date: Dec 1, 2003 1:05am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

Do we want quality or quanitity is the real question... and when its music Quality should win everytime!


I don't see this as a quantity/quality issue. Even if mp3s were hosted the shn/flacs would be here as well so anyone who cared could get the lossless audio. As has been previously stated, if you get your music from lossless archives (which this one would still be) or from trades from trusted sources with documented md5s then there is no problem. This is what I do and it seems that most people on here probably do this as well. It seems to me that the major concern then is over people burning the mp3s to cds and trading the lossy audio thus causing degradation to the trading pool right?? First of all, this is already happening right now regarless of what anyone wants. I know a lot of people who listen to mp3s and if someone wanted a copy, they will make them one. But most people who listen to and deal in mp3s don't trade very much anyway, they download the music from the internet obviously (thats why its mp3 duh). Second, someone who is willing to accept a trade from someone who has an mp3 sourced show obviously doesn't care that much about quality. So why make them care, we already know where to get the lossless audio. Any serious trader wouldn't bother trading with them, they would have higher standards. Just as right now there are people sharing mp3s and it doesn't bother us because it doesn't affect us or the preservation of lossless audio that many of us are dedicated to. I would be against archiving mp3s if no companion lossless format was available, unless requested by an artist.

But of course it doesn't matter because of the 'take my ball and go home' attitude that is so prevalent here. I've got a question, if so many people are so 'concerned' about the trading pool, if your tapes are so great and you withhold them from wider circulation allowing lower quality sources to circulate, isn't that degrading the trading pool as well? I know from personal experience that an mp3 of a good source still sounds better than a lossless copy of a much inferior source.

peace,
Brandon

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: NickDiegel Date: Dec 4, 2003 5:20pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

As has been previously stated, if you get your music from lossless archives (which this one would still be) or from trades from trusted sources with documented md5s then there is no problem.

==========

This archive can *not* remain lossless if there are mp3's on the site. Mp3 = lossy... any loss = lossy... lossless = no loss...

I'm just glad I only post sbd's that I record now...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: woostahDave Date: Dec 1, 2003 4:10am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

I do appreciate the work tapers do to get us the music. i would be right there with you if i had the time and money to invest. but i do not think that gives you the right to dictate policy. it should be up to the community and the bands.

"Do we want quality or quanitity is the real question..."

most people here can have their cake and eat it. we do not have to choose between quality and quantity. I have about 15 spindles worth of shns sitting next to my computer and about 100 gigs on my hard drive. it would be unfair for me to insist that quality should always trump quantity when i am able to amass such a collection. mp3's are meant for those without the means or the equipment to enjoy shn.

"when its music Quality should win everytime!"

quality is extremely subjective. most people outside of our tight circle would consider the crowd noise, hiss and reverb of live shows to be far worse problems than mp3 compression. should we not allow aud recordings when sbd's are available? or the other way around, since some people prefer the ambience of aud? it is all about choice. you should not worry about mp3's infiltrating your trading circles, since I am sure you are very careful about your sources and would be able to detect any mp3 contamination immediately.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: zorak Date: Dec 1, 2003 9:25am
Forum: etree Subject: q vs. q and q vs. q

The divide is almost palpable.

Quality vs. Quality:

An air compressor whirrs occasionally in the garage. A needle floats on a cushion of air across a pristine piece of vinyl. A tube amp causes you to glance to the left because you heard the vocalists mic stand slide a little across the stage.

vs.

Perhaps instead you were listening to a 24bit/96Khz digital recording which caught almost as many subtle moments.

Or,

Bela Fleck seemed to be playing ping pong with Zakir Hussain. They were in a once in a lifetime groove.

vs.

They all forgot which song they were supposed to be playing. The drummer wandered back in time and the rest had no idea what planet they were on. Phil went strolling around the pastures gathering them all up and leading them home.


Quantity vs. Quantity:

16 track 2" tape. Portable? Accessible?

vs.

24bit 96Khz download. 2GB/hour.

vs.

?

Or,

Using the original recording I was able to determine more precisely the hand motions used during the transitions the theramin player was making. Never before have I picked up such detail.

vs.

For the past 10 weeks I've been using my daily alloted 2 hours of internet access to download over 10 shows. It has been really hard trying to get downloads to complete over a 33.6 connection, but a year ago there was no internet connectivity. If you wonder why, in a place so far away, I spend so much time downloading this new music, don't. You won't wonder once you have the ability to download the music we play here.


The Q's have it!!

Musicians that have a liberal taping policy have allowed for the spread of art. Tapers are artists in their own right. They capture moments in history. Moments that include the art on stage as well as the electricity in the room.

Those moments in history are important. They are as important as books, movies, speeches, etc... they are a part of the human experience.

Technology has allowed those moments to not only be recorded, but also to be shared.

We need to tread carefully when discussing access. Technological penetration is not ubiquitous. Bandwidth is not ubiquitous.

Artistic integrity is what I sense is the greatest fear that tapers face. Their name is attached to a recording of a performance. Just like the musician expects the taped recording to reflect reasonably accurately the live performance, the taper wants to ensure that the quality of the recording is preserved as it spreads slowly across the entire planet.

The availability of live music recordings is a great thing. I don't think anyone wants to prevent a group of people in Uganda from listening to the String Cheese Incident. The question is how to accomplish this while still maintaining and recognizing the contributions of the taper and the musician.

If it really is about the art and the impact a recording has upon its listeners, then the tapers are invaluable heros. By the same token, that show should be heard by all... whether they are dubbing tapes in the basement or hopping across mountaintops in Laos across a pedal powered internet.

I'm not tied to either side of the issue, simply trying to expand the horizon beyond the medium itself and into the areas that will matter 5 or 10 years from now. Will the world be a better place because a larger percentage of the global population was able to listen to Cowboy Junkies?

(The question is rhetorical. The answer is yes)


This post was modified by zorak on 2003-12-01 17:25:10

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: InfiniteOhms Date: Dec 1, 2003 1:17pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: q vs. q and q vs. q

i would just like to say that that is the most confusing post i have ever read.... Will you explain the phisics of a quark to me ;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Nov 29, 2003 11:15am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

So the "walk around angry" part isn't even relevant? (Just funnin' ya!) ;)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: rhcp1513 Date: Nov 30, 2003 7:41am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

I'm not a taper myself, although I did try to tape a show once (it didn't turn out so well), but I can understand their concern about quality presevation. I'm probably a minority here on the LMA because I use a 56k modem. When I first found this place, I was really turned off by the fact that everything was shn and not mp3. But over time I've gotten to like the fact that it is shn. In this way, somebody can't just walk in off the street and download music. They have to invest time in finding a program that recognizes shn's.
This allows for a person to acquire a respect for the lossless sound quality. I'm willing to wait out the hour to download a 4 minute song if I know the quality is good.
I'm totally against the idea of mp3 show's on the LMA, but short clips of songs in mp3 format sounds like a wonderful idea. This would give a madem user like myself an opportunity to hear what they are going to download first, instead of jumping in head first and finding out that the recoding quality of the show is less than desirable.
While I wouldn't go as far as the tapers who would abandon the archive if mp3's were hosted, I would be dissapointed.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: The Sound Hound Date: Nov 30, 2003 8:27am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

Might it be possible to make restrictions such as bit rate and source for mp3s? I know from experience that 192kbps mp3 files made from quality sources sound exactly like those quality sources. It might be some sort of compromise to restrict mp3 files to only 192kbps or higher bit rates made only from concert masters or shn/flac files. The mp3s would be still relatively large for dial up users, but not nearly as large as actual shn or flac files.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 30, 2003 10:50pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

yeah thats like saying.. well they dont have to be diamonds they can just be very very nice glass :-)

I like the view pointed out just 2 posts above... the fact that far too many people are assuming that people will just take the mp3's and not trade them... its hard enough to educate people when they are just SHN's.. brewsters long post about wanting broader access does not point out that there are many SHN communities like the DMB community which are welcoming new members everyday... because its in SHN/Flac they are forced to learn more about the computer and with a built up community many people are willing to teach others and give B+P's and most importantly build up the standards of the community not bring them down..

I also think its interesting that it has not been pointed out that hard drives are getting smaller/cheaper... Highspeed is becoming available almost everywhere..CD's are still the standard but for how long.. DVD-Audio is starting to take a tiny market share and more and more people are looking at getting DVD-Audio players.. not to mention more and more 24 bit shows which will be much more common in 2004... WHy is it not reasonable to see SHN/Flac as being the trading communities standard..?? (Oh wait, it is the standard)

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Dec 11, 2003 4:25am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: mp3 and broader-based access

don't want anything i've taped on here till i know for sure it won't be converted to mp3

George, how about this latest potential compromise, which would accomodate your basic aim?

http://www.archive.org/iathreads/post-view.php?id=10746

Reasoned reply (if any) should go to that thread, not here. Thanks!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SFSpearit Date: Dec 2, 2003 9:28am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

I run a spearhead fansite and have shows in SHN and MP3. I do not encode to MP3 unless the taper is cool with it. Most of the shows I tape with my friend so there is no conflict. I have found that while broadband access is available in the US most of the world does not have it. The MP3s on my site get downloaded by overseas users. I am fine with that because it brings Spearhead music to different countries.

I personally do not worry about polluting the trading pool (mostly because they are my seeds) but because I do make SHNs first. Those shns are recorded with etree and are always the same as the original source. That is the beauty of SHN. That is why I trade SHNs. That is why I joined etree. Audio CDs are not the original source. I know if I want the real EXACT COPY of a show I get the SHNs. If the Audio CD pool of Spearhead music is contaminated I do not worry about it bacause the SHNs are always pure. That is just my feeling on the matter.

Peace

Matt

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: VA_TAPER Date: Dec 2, 2003 9:55am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

power to the peaceful, matt

hopefully more will decide this is about SHARING music!!

peace, chris

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: scott brown Date: Nov 27, 2003 10:19pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

i don't see what there is to discuss

if archive.org converts stuff to mp3 or hosts shows in mp3, i'll never upload again and ask that shows i taped are removed.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: nmculbreth Date: Nov 28, 2003 12:11pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

i agree if the archive starts to convert tapes to mp3 - mine or anyone elses - i'll look to share my tapes elsewhere and ask that they never be uploaded to the here. i'd be fine w/ a few sample tracks in mp3 or some 30 second previews clips but that is as far as i think the archive should go.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: akb Date: Nov 28, 2003 2:18am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Out of curiousity does this mean you would leave if the IA converted other people's stuff or just your own? Say that people were given the option of not having their shows transcoded to other formats.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Nov 28, 2003 6:40am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: ISO mp3 common ground

In the same vein Scott, what would your reaction be if some artists specified that they *wanted* a supplementary mp3 choice (the innocent query that actually started off the last thread?)

How would your reaction differ if those were a) band(s) you tape, b) bands you don't tape, c) mixture?

Essay question, probing for the "common ground" thing... :)

Other tapers may also submit essays. ;)

This post was modified by hamilton on 2003-11-28 14:40:44

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Nov 28, 2003 6:43am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: ISO mp3 common ground

what would your reaction be if some artists specified that they *wanted* a supplementary mp3 choice (the innocent query that actually started off the last thread?)

If an artist I taped approached me and asked me to convert a show or song I taped of theirs to mp3 I would do it. I have done it, in fact. So if an artist said to the archive, there MUST be a supplemental mp3 version of every show made available, there's not much I can say to that. We all have to abide by the artists' taping policies, after all.

However, if an artist simply doesn't care whether their songs are in mp3 or not, to me this is different and I would not be ok with me to have my shows available in mp3. In fact I'm not really cool with having any mp3 recordings hosted. What you need to understand that for a lot of these artists, the community of tapers and traders have spent a lot of time and effort making sure only the best and most pure sources are available for ALL the artist's taped shows, not just the shows we ourselves taped.

How would your reaction differ if those were a) band(s) you tape, b) bands you don't tape, c) mixture?

I just think the whole mp3 thing sets a dangerous precedent, and unless an artist makes a requirement for MP3s - which I can't imagine too many would - I wouldn't want them on the archive as full songs or shows.

I would be cool with 15 second or 30 second mp3 clips so people could hear how a show sounds though.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 28, 2003 7:09am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: ISO mp3 common ground

I agree with Scott in as far as if whole shows are hosted here on archive in mp3 I would stop uploading my sources and request that any shows I recorded were removed and even request that an *artist* was removed that I work for.

The only room for compromise from my view is a short mp3 sample (never a full track) of a show to give the fan/downloader an idea of what they are getting.. its also pointless to start talking about alternate compressed formats in place of mp3 like ogg.

I think if we start having (as an example) half the artists with mp3's and SHN/Flac and the other half with just SHN/Flac that is just asking for a lot of trouble and is sending a totally mixed message.

Frankly the mp3 show for the Minutemen is already sending a mixed message and I wonder why that has even been allowed??

-matt c

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Diana Hamilton Date: Nov 28, 2003 7:36am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: ISO mp3 common ground

if whole shows are hosted here on archive in mp3 I would stop uploading

Matt, to explore your view point, may I ask: If a band such as Jimmie's Chicken Shack (which I gather you don't tape) specifically requested companion mp3s be here, would that example cause you to stop?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: dgrayshn Date: Nov 28, 2003 8:37am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: ISO mp3 common ground

yeah it would cause me to stop and it would cause a LOT of other tapers to stop too..

samples yes.. full shows out of the question..

thats the way i see it..

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Ethan P. Date: Nov 28, 2003 1:26pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

.

This post was modified by Ethan P. on 2003-11-28 21:26:14

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Nov 28, 2003 6:26am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

May I point out also, that worse that having mp3s around, is that many concerts are only available from a MiniDisc source. Supporting them and boycotting mp3 would be extremely hypocritical.

I don't think you really understand the issue here. It's about avoiding the degradation of already existing sources. It's not about only allowing certain sources onto the archive.

If somebody records a show to MD (or analog cassette) and wants to post it to the archive, I'm all for it. Not everybody has the money to use DAT's or laptops.

However, say somebody taped a show to DAT and a MD taper patched out of that person. Or at some point in post-production the show was converted to MD. If the DAT source is available on the archive, the MD version of the same source has no business being here.

Do you see how this is different from the example you gave, and how this directly relates to mp3s?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: akb Date: Nov 28, 2003 8:46am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

What about his points about the Open Source Audio and Net Labels collections already having a significant amount of lossy content hosted here? With the closure and destruction of the content on mp3.com that amount is likely to increase significantly.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Nov 28, 2003 4:06pm
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

I really don't concern myself with other sections of archive.org. I am only concerned with the Live Music Archive, which was founded on the principles of the etree.org community which sought (and continues to seek) the proliferation of high quality sources throughout the community.

You can do whatever you want in the rest of the archive.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: akb Date: Nov 29, 2003 2:17am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

The only difference between audio in the LMA and the rest of the site is one field in the database. So, as far as your concerned lossy audio is fine as long as its on a different part of the site?

It sounds like there's plenty of room for compromise there.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Nov 29, 2003 2:37am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

The only difference between audio in the LMA and the rest of the site is one field in the database. So, as far as your concerned lossy audio is fine as long as its on a different part of the site?

The scope of this discussion is the Live Music Archive, not any other part of the archive. Like I said, I do not concern myself with the rest of the archive as I do not use it, so I don't really have an opinion on what formats they use.

It sounds like there's plenty of room for compromise there.

I don't think I really understand what you mean. Are you suggesting a compromise would be allowing mp3s on other parts of the archive but not the LMA? Obviously I would be ok with that, but I don't think that's really germane to this discussion. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you though?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: akb Date: Nov 29, 2003 3:10am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

My interest is in listening to the music in a reasonable amount of time. I don't really care which part of the IA website the music resides on. It sounds like you do care which part of the website lossless only music resides on, namely the LMA part of the website.

From that a workable compromise sounds like when people upload a lossless piece of audio they are given the choice of whether a lossy version may be hosted with it. If they indicate that its acceptable for a lossy version to be made the listing for it will not appear in the LMA part of the website.

Does that clear up what I was driving at?

Now, whether this is acceptable to the community as a whole is another question.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Nov 29, 2003 3:42am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Does that clear up what I was driving at?

I understand what your driving at but I don't agree. What I was referring to is the part of the audio archive that hosts audio that is not live concerts. Hosting full shows or even entire songs in mp3 in any part of the archive is not cool with me. A duck is still a duck by any other name.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: akb Date: Nov 29, 2003 3:58am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

Well I'm glad I kept asking so I could figure out what your position is and make sure that I was not misunderstood.

So, you would leave if a live music concert in a lossy format were uploaded to the OSA part of the website and the IA did not remove it? Given the open publishing policy of that section I can't help but imagine that it is inevitable that that occur, espcially in light of the situation at mp3.com.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: thoman8r Date: Nov 29, 2003 4:41am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: It would seem brewster is back ... mp3 disscussion time?

So, you would leave if a live music concert in a lossy format were uploaded to the OSA part of the website and the IA did not remove it?

I'm not going to directly respond to your question because I doubt archive.org intended for the OSA to become a way to circumvent the policies of its other audio sections, and have to believe that they would take measures to prevent that from happening.

Let me be as clear as possible: I don't want any live concerts or individual songs made available in mp3 on this site unless an artist has a policy of MANDATORY mp3 inclusion for their stuff to be made available here. Not my stuff, not anyone elses.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: InfiniteOhms Date: Nov 30, 2003 2:33am
Forum: etree Subject: Re: ... mp3 disscussion ... could we vote on this?

I as a taper dont realy mind if my stuff is converted to MP3, BUT i am willing to throw in my vote against mp3, because if it where to go through i suspect them more then half (possibly more) of the tapers that currently upload to this site will just plain stop.

By the way, could this be a voting situation? Or is it more like the admins will decide despite public outcry or no?